Part II: Tools for an effective follow-up and implementation Code, including prison directors, the Ministry of Justice, NPM experts and independent experts met twice a month, before subsequently sharing the results with civil society. œœ General working groups In Bulgaria, the Government set up an inter-agency working group consisting of representatives from different ministries, the judiciary, the prosecutor’s office, and civil society, where issues raised by the NPM and CPT reports are discussed. While the working group is focused on the necessary legal amendments, the NPM notes that it uses it as an opportunity to discuss the bigger picture and to include other preventive measures. According to the NPM, the experience with the working group has been very positive as the participants are responsive towards the issues raised by the NPM and are willing to make changes. According to the Bulgarian NPM, this has led the Ministry of Interior to establish a special working group focusing on medical issues. In Cyprus the NPM created a general working group consisting of focal points from each ministry, which meets at least twice a year or anytime the NPM considers it necessary. The goal of the working group was to create an environment where officials from all authorities and the NPM can discuss general issues of interest for them. The group also serves as a platform to resolve issues and discuss measures that might require coordination between the different authorities as well as to address common problems with the help of the NPM. So far the working group mainly has discussed the NPM’s annual reports and the CPT report. In the future it is planned to arrange thematic meetings to discuss subjects that might be of interest to participants.164 The rationale behind the establishment of the working group is to enable informal and personal exchange and to address and solve problems collectively, rather than shifting the responsibility from one to another. The NPM considers that the experiences with the working group are very positive, noting that it has proven to be a useful platform for authorities to coordinate among themselves. The challenge so far has only been to find a date where everyone, and especially those knowledgeable and with influence, are available. Due to the success of the working group the Cypriot NPM decided to establish a similar forum for NGOs which ultimately would be merged with the other working group. Also in the UK, NPM bodies take part in working groups established by the state (advisory or ministerial boards) as observers, providing information and advice. Overall, NPMs’ experiences with working groups have been very positive and achieved constructive dialogue and tangible impact. However, as for regular meetings, participation in such working groups will of course require resources from the NPM. Some NPMs warned that such meetings might take up valuable time and problems risk being ‘talked to death’, with little practical impact. Thus, it is recommended that working groups define clear goals and outcomes from the beginning and evaluate the impact achieved over time. 1.6 Training Some NPMs carry out training for state authorities including personnel in places of detention, and have described this as a useful forum for dialogue with the authorities, particularly at the operational level. Training activities have shown to provide room for the NPM to present its work and explain the rationale behind the recommendations it makes, and for the authorities to voice their concerns 164 - 58 - See BIM and HRIC, ‘Baseline study on follow-up of NPMs in the EU: Country Chapter Cyprus’ (November 2014).